« previous   misc   next »

Union Thugs try to shutdown access to LAX airport


By zzyzzx   Follow   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:56am PST   5,142 views   61 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike (3)  

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/20/Thanksgiving-LAX-shutdown-union

Thanksgiving Eve one of the busiest travel days of the year to snarl traffic around Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). President Obamas favorite union, the Service Employees International Union, is spearheading the obnoxious effort; its supposed to last from 11 a.m to 4 p.m., virtually the entire day.

« First     « Previous     Comments 22-61 of 61     Last »

kentm   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 5:59pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 22

And this:

http://robertreich.org/post/36219730368

Why You Shouldn’t Shop at Walmart on Friday

"A half century ago America’s largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today’s dollars, including health and pension benefits.

Today, America’s largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart’s employees work less than 28 hours per week and don’t qualify for benefits.

There are many reasons for the difference – including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.

But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits. "

kentm   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 6:10pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 23

I can't help but wonder what the "conservatives" think they're doing by hating on and breaking unions, other than enabling corporations to break the ability of common American folks to earn decent living wages...

Is that your intention 'conservatives', to break your country so that the trans national corporations can make a bit more money? I thought you guys LOVED America? Why are you pushing so hard to destroy it?

uomo_senza_nome   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 10:22pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 24

kentm says

I thought you guys LOVED America? Why are you pushing so hard to destroy it?

Start with the premise that the "conservatives" are hypocrites on everything and things become a lot more clear.

kentm   Thu, 22 Nov 2012, 1:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 25

Yeah, rhetorical question... I don't know why I keep asking them...

zzyzzx   Thu, 22 Nov 2012, 11:21pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 26

kentm says

I can't help but wonder what the "conservatives" think they're doing by hating on and breaking unions, other than enabling corporations to break the ability of common American folks to earn decent living wages...

I hope that in the absence of unions, companies will be less likely to move jobs overseas. Nothing seems to push jobs out of the us quicker than unions.

zzyzzx   Thu, 22 Nov 2012, 11:22pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (2)     Comment 27

kentm says

Why You Shouldn’t Shop at Walmart on Friday

You really shouldn't shop anywhere on Friday. I don't even want to drive past any stores.

kentm   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 2:09am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 28

But are you against unions in retail or at the LAX? There's no chance of those jobs going overseas so this particular issue is all about living wages and standards here.

So then you WOULD support unions within Walmart, correct? Or for transit employees, or for resource companies such as lumber and mining, as it'll mean the people working there will be able to better earn living wages that will support their families and lives and continue to support the local economies of their neighborhoods and country?

zzyzzx   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 2:18am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 29

kentm says

But are you against unions in retail

No.

kentm says

or at the LAX?

Yes.

kentm   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 2:20am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 30

And why not in the transportation industry?

Unions are one method, without resorting to regulation, to keep money flowing within local economies - it's been shown that "trickle down" is BS. It's the way to ensure that corporations are more than simple money extraction machines, bleeding local economies.

zzyzzx   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 2:25am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 31

kentm says

And why not in the transportation industry?

The union thugs blocking the airport are public employees.

The retail employees are private. If I don't like that, or anything else about the store, I can shop elsewhere. With the public employees, the only choice I seem to have is to pay higher taxes to support their bloated pension and benefit packages.

Kevin   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 5:46am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 32

I'm ok with not having public-sector unions, but I feel that most people who make the same claim really just hate unions in general. They've bought into the republican lie that unions are the reason why American companies can't compete, instead of placing the blame on globalization where it belongs.

These people who claim to want to keep jobs in america truly mean that -- they just believe that those jobs should pay about 50 cents an hour and provide no benefits.

Of course, at least in China there's a public health care system.

zzyzzx   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 6:18am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 33

Kevin says

These people who claim to want to keep jobs in america truly mean that -- they just believe that those jobs should pay about 50 cents an hour and provide no benefits.

That's not true. Plenty of times when made in USA stuff was still in the stores you would see competing made in China stuff at the same price. Which to me implies that someone is making a huge profit off the imported stuff instead of passing along the savings. Since that is generally the case, I would think that it should be easy enough to make stuff here without raising pricing much at current us wages.

Right now I am looking to buy some tires, and it's really not much of a price difference to get something domestic either.

kentm   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 12:12pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 34

zzyzzx says

kentm says

And why not in the transportation industry?

The union thugs blocking the airport are public employees.

The retail employees are private. If I don't like that, or anything else about the store, I can shop elsewhere. With the public employees, the only choice I seem to have is to pay higher taxes to support their bloated pension and benefit packages.

So it all basically comes down to personal convenience for you. I see.

marcus   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 12:41pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 35

rooemoore says

It's funny, but when a corporation does something awful, people don't say all corporations are bad. Unions have been excessively demonized and continue to be by brainless parrots like zzyzzx who do the dirty work of greedy assholes.

That sums it up pretty well.

I would say a lot of us are just extremely gullible. When you have an extremely gullible person who's also not real bright, and living in this country, then there's a good chance they will be a fundamentalist Christion, or a "parrot" as you say, of right wing emotion sold to them by the right wing entertainment complex.

marcus   Fri, 23 Nov 2012, 12:52pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 36

"Why should that cop get to retire with a pension, after working hard in a service job for 35 years, for relatively low take home pay, when I'm middle aged and haven't saved hardly anything for retirement ? "

"I want everyone in America to feel just as fucked over as I do, or more so, because I'm proud to be an American. We're such intelligent and loving people."

zzyzzx   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 12:37am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (2)     Comment 37

marcus says

"Why should that cop get to retire with a pension, after working hard in a service job for 35 years, for relatively low take home pay

They don't make low pay though.
http://www.njsp.org/recruit/salary.html
The current starting salary for a trooper is $62,403.60 (including uniform allowance). The second-year total compensation significantly increases to $69,489.30. Top pay for a Trooper I is $108,847.13. Troopers receive yearly increments.

And that's with full benefits, including a defined benefit pension. Those figures do not include overtime, which can be substantial.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 2:28am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 38

Union is a thing of the past. It is nothing more than labor collusion.

Outlaw unions! With at-will employment, workers already have the best protection possible: I QUIT!

marcus   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 3:28am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 39

Peter P says

With at-will employment, workers already have the best protection possible: I QUIT!

That's real logical (not).

For the simplicity of making the point, say you have a universe with a few owners/bosses and 100 potential workers. And the total number of jobs is 90. What's to keep the owner bosses from keeping pay too low, especially at the low end ?

(Not taking in to account the fact that the owners businesses depend on the workers having disposable income to spend at their businesses)

At least in relatively low skill jobs, as long as the ratio of workers to jobs is high enough, quitting doesn't give you leverage.

Even for some skilled jobs, if there are a sufficient number of people interested or willing to do the job, then quitting only serves to bring a less qualified replacement in.

Hey it's government service work right ? We like to argue that government can't do things well, right ? So what's the problem with making government work less well paid ? It's a win/win ?

Bring in the private sector, right ?

With respect to public education, and teachers, what "the owners" are trying to do to is pay teachers even less than they are now. Even though as it is now, a high percentage of teachers don't last more than 5 years.

This isn't rocket science. But I guess it is closer to being rocket science than the typical right wing union hater is to being a rocket scientist.

marcus   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 3:36am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 40

zzyzzx says

They don't make low pay though.

I can use google too. What, did you google "highest paying police jobs" ?

Of course state police jobs pay more too.

Here for a little more balance.

http://policelink.monster.com/benefits/articles/9998-best-and-worst-places-to-be-a-cop

The source is an industry site with no bias one way or the other. Oh,...I see big surprise. New Jersey is the highest.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 4:44am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 41

marcus says

For the simplicity of making the point, say you have a universe with a few owners/bosses and 100 potential workers. And the total number of jobs is 90. What's to keep the owner bosses from keeping pay too low, especially at the low end ?

Easy. The workers can become the bosses.

Quigley   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 5:38am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 42

I work at the port of LA, through which the majority of Chinese imports travel to get to US markets. Every job here, outside of management, is a union job. Unions hold jobs here to higher wages, good benefits, and safe working standards. This directly impacts shipping costs on a per container scale, adding maybe 30% to the cost of an item you buy at Walmart or target or anywhere hat sells Chinese goods. If this area was non union, wages would be halved, benefits would be sketchy, and the cost of goods could drop another 15% or more.
This would be a terrible thing for America. Right now, the high union wages amount to the only tariff paid by importers, the only reason the few American manufacturers left here can compete at all! It's also a big funnel of money into he surrounding community, making possible all manner of service industry (doctors included) jobs, and providing a vast market of people with money to buy product.
This has made for a strong economy.
Unions made it possible.
The rest of you can spend an extra couple of dollars on that throw pillow.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 6:39am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 43

On the contrary, I believe in global single-market capitalism. If we remove all tariffs, everybody will become better off in the long run. Although China can sell to us, we can sell to them too.

Any trade barrier impedes the functioning of the market, and this will manifest itself as distortions somewhere else.

There really ought not be borders for people and goods.

Kevin   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 8:34am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 44

zzyzzx says

Kevin says

These people who claim to want to keep jobs in america truly mean that -- they just believe that those jobs should pay about 50 cents an hour and provide no benefits.

That's not true. Plenty of times when made in USA stuff was still in the stores you would see competing made in China stuff at the same price. Which to me implies that someone is making a huge profit off the imported stuff instead of passing along the savings. Since that is generally the case, I would think that it should be easy enough to make stuff here without raising pricing much at current us wages.

Right now I am looking to buy some tires, and it's really not much of a price difference to get something domestic either.

Yes, there are many industries where Americans can be competitive. They're the ones that don't require tons of low-skilled manual labor.

Expecting generic "factory jobs" to make a comeback in the US is stupid and pointless.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 12:17pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 45

We should permanently peg minimum wage to $0.00 and we will find out the true value of labor.

mmmarvel   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 1:31pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 46

zzyzzx says

I hope that in the absence of unions, companies will be less likely to move jobs overseas. Nothing seems to push jobs out of the us quicker than unions.

I always told my wife that if I EVER built a company big enough that my employees joined/formed a union. I'd shut the thing down the next day, fortunately none of my companies have ever gotten that big, but I won't deal with a union. I try to treat my employees fairly, if they want to force me to do something (afterall it is my money and my rear end on the line if the damn company fails), I'll shut the thing down. I'm not forcing anyone to work there, if what I'm asking seems so unreasonable to them, then quit or I will and take those jobs with me.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 1:36pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 47

If unions are allowed to take collective actions then companies should also be allowed to collude against consumers.

Employers are consumers of labor.

marcus   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 1:58pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 48

Weak. Extremely weak.

kentm   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 2:23pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 49

Peter P says

Easy. The workers can become the bosses.

Now you support socialism?

kentm   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 2:29pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 50

Peter P says

If unions are allowed to take collective actions then companies should also be allowed to collude against consumers.

Employers are consumers of labor.

Ha ha ha. Not sure what else to say about that comment. Stupid from the get go. To begin with what do you mean when you write "allowed"?

Who's "allowing" (or put another way: "regulating") who can speak to whom and what they can discuss & organize about? So you ARE for gov regulation then, as long as it suppresses what you don't like?...

I bet you didn't even think about that power structure you've presented - because you've totally internalized it - until I mentioned it.

Get your house in order before spouting off on these subjects.

kentm   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 2:39pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 51

And mmarvel: good for you then, if what you say is true. Treat your people fairly and there won't be a need for them to form a union to force them to do so. I think thats fine.

But recognize that the notion of forming a union is something people do in order to combat an imbalance that is not repairable in any other way. In many cases people are locked in to jobs and exploited because of it. Unions are their attempt to rectify the imbalance.

The only part of your post that I find problematic is your smugness about the power you wield over the people who's lives depend and are affected by your choices, and the apparent whimsical attitude you have toward them.

Recognize also that a small potatoes business with very limited reach and power within local economy is not the same as a major player.

Peter P   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 2:50pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 52

kentm says

But recognize that the notion of forming a union is something people do in order to combat an imbalance that is not repairable in any other way. In many cases people are locked in to jobs and exploited because of it. Unions are their attempt to rectify the imbalance.

People are rarely locked into their jobs in this country. We have something called at-will employment. Workers can pretty much walk away anytime they want.

Besides, any worker can become his own boss. Or they can grow his business and become other people's boss.

The moment people believe they are entitled to a good job all is lost.

kentm   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 10:52pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 53

It's not about "entitlement". You should know that or is it something you just tell yourself to help you feel better? It's about employees earning a decent wage and finding a better way to share in the results of their labors. I can see that your problem is that you've bought into the notion that the "big idea" is the most valuable thing there is, and that the labor to build that idea is worth nothing or as little as you can get away with.

Anyway, if people form a union then why not accept it the same way you accept that companies can fire people "at will"? Because it suits your position and income to think so I suppose... You just like the answers that support your current income, which is fair enough, for small minded people who can't see beyond their immediate circumstances.

Besides, as you say businesses, like yours I suppose, are always free to close down and restart somewhere else, right?

kentm   Sat, 24 Nov 2012, 10:58pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 54

And "at will" is a scam that benefits employers only.

Anyone can quit any job with a couple or a few weeks notice anyway. What "at will" means is that employers can fire anyone at any time for no reason whatsoever with no fear of retaliation for wrongful dismissal. It puts all power into the hands of the employer,it's not something that is a benefit for employees as you seem to be claiming. But that you like this fits in with your general pattern of seeming to support ideas that directly benefit you.

mmmarvel   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 6:43am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 55

kentm says

And "at will" is a scam that benefits employers only.

Anyone can quit any job with a couple or a few weeks notice anyway.

And I've known, seen and had done to me, employees who simply don't show up one day. You spend a few days trying to make sure they are okay, why didn't they show up, etc. Only to find out, they either got another job or just didn't like the job or whatever, it's amazing the number of people who just don't come to work because they've decided that they've quit, don't tell you, just don't show up.

kentm says

But recognize that the notion of forming a union is something people do in order to combat an imbalance that is not repairable in any other way.

Maybe, but there are just as many people who will join because the reps from the union tell them they can get better wages, be 'protected', etc. Not that they are necessarily be treated unfairly, but the union is looking for more dues and members.

Peter P   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 6:55am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 56

kentm says

It's about employees earning a decent wage and finding a better way to share in the results of their labors.

No. Labor is a commodity. Employees can always earn a satisfactory wage by participating in the right markets. No one is entitlement to a "decent" wage simply by doing a "good" job.

Peter P   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 6:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 57

When I was an employee I went to sleep every night with the comforting thought that I had the power to quit at any time. I am just the kind of person who needs a exit strategy for everything.

At-will employment is the greatest system in the world. It benefits everyone.

marcus   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 7:45am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 58

This is nonsense. So by your "reasoning" unions were never necessary, ever, and in mankind's history, workers have never been exploited ?

Or is it that workers have been exploited (and maybe even are now - especially in places like China), but this is something that in time markets and your beautiful at-will system will fix ?

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure you are just being a troll and you don't even believe that nonsensical jibberish.

But I'm sure you will reassert it, without even a trace of logic or support for your assertion.

If you can't even trace out any kind of thoughtful rationale, but only make empty assertions, then this proves you are espousing nothing more than dogma.

marcus   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 8:02am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 59

It isn't that workers are entitled to a certain pay. It's that they are entitled to organize, and to use that organization to negotiate pay that is more fair.

What's fair ?

That's a good question, given globalization and cheaper labor market elsewhere. But one thing that isn't really even debatable is that our economy will continue to be significantly (not totally) driven by domestic consumption. And therefore we need our citizens to have income beyond just bare needs. And meeting only those bare needs is the level that wages are naturally drawn toward because of globalization and international competition.

This in turn causes workers to complain about government workers being paid a level that was once considered not so great. "Their benefits are too good !" "Their union is evil !"

This feeling out there is the sound of wages in general being ratcheted lower. I'm amazed at how many people can not comprehend that.

marcus   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 8:09am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 60

Is it possible that sometimes forcing pay to be higher in an industy, brings better workers in, and improves that industries global competitiveness ?

What comes first, the chicken or the egg ?

What comes first better products or better workers who are attracted to the industry because of a union and decent pay ?

See Germany. It can be argued that it's more democratic to give lower level workers more of a say in certain policies, including the way profits are distributed.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2011/12/21/germany-builds-twice-as-many-cars-as-the-u-s-while-paying-its-auto-workers-twice-as-much/

Peter P   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 8:28am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 61

marcus says

So by your "reasoning" unions were never necessary, ever, and in the mankind's history, workers have never been exploited ?

So long as people choose to be exploited they will be exploited. By these people or those.

« First     « Previous comments    

zzyzzx is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net